R. Graham, C. Miller, E. Oh, and D. Yu, Nano Lett., 11, 717 (2011).

Z. R. Khan, M. S. Khan, M. Zulfequar, and M. S. Khan, Mat. Sci. Appl. 2, 340 (2011).

K. P. Acharya and B. Ullrich, Proc. SPIE 6890, 68900Q (2008).

[CrossRef]

H. Kind, H. Yan, B. Messer, M. Law, and P. Yang, Adv. Mat. 14, 158 (2002).

M. D. Tabak and P. J. Warter, Phys. Rev. 148, 982 (1966).

[CrossRef]

R. N. Hall, Proc. IEE—Part B 106, 923 (1959).

K. P. Acharya and B. Ullrich, Proc. SPIE 6890, 68900Q (2008).

[CrossRef]

M. Bleicher, Halbleiter-Optoelektronik (Huethig, 1985).

Space-charge limited photocurrent scales with Iin3/4; see V. D. Mihailetchi, J. Wildeman, and P. W. M. Blom, Phys. Rev. Lett.94, 126602 (2005), and references therein.

[CrossRef]

R. Graham, C. Miller, E. Oh, and D. Yu, Nano Lett., 11, 717 (2011).

R. N. Hall, Proc. IEE—Part B 106, 923 (1959).

Z. R. Khan, M. S. Khan, M. Zulfequar, and M. S. Khan, Mat. Sci. Appl. 2, 340 (2011).

Z. R. Khan, M. S. Khan, M. Zulfequar, and M. S. Khan, Mat. Sci. Appl. 2, 340 (2011).

Z. R. Khan, M. S. Khan, M. Zulfequar, and M. S. Khan, Mat. Sci. Appl. 2, 340 (2011).

In Ref. [6] no information was provided about the impurity concentration in the sample. We noticed, however, that the reported M∼6×1017 cm−3 for ZnO nanowires by H. Oh, J.-J. Kim, J.-O. Lee, and S. S. Kim, J. Korean Phys. Soc.58, 291 (2011), is in good agreement with our fit result. We stress, however, that we do not have specifics about the presence of surface traps in the samples used in Ref. [6], and, therefore, the actual M number can differ from our finding.

[CrossRef]

In Ref. [6] no information was provided about the impurity concentration in the sample. We noticed, however, that the reported M∼6×1017 cm−3 for ZnO nanowires by H. Oh, J.-J. Kim, J.-O. Lee, and S. S. Kim, J. Korean Phys. Soc.58, 291 (2011), is in good agreement with our fit result. We stress, however, that we do not have specifics about the presence of surface traps in the samples used in Ref. [6], and, therefore, the actual M number can differ from our finding.

[CrossRef]

H. Kind, H. Yan, B. Messer, M. Law, and P. Yang, Adv. Mat. 14, 158 (2002).

H. Kind, H. Yan, B. Messer, M. Law, and P. Yang, Adv. Mat. 14, 158 (2002).

In Ref. [6] no information was provided about the impurity concentration in the sample. We noticed, however, that the reported M∼6×1017 cm−3 for ZnO nanowires by H. Oh, J.-J. Kim, J.-O. Lee, and S. S. Kim, J. Korean Phys. Soc.58, 291 (2011), is in good agreement with our fit result. We stress, however, that we do not have specifics about the presence of surface traps in the samples used in Ref. [6], and, therefore, the actual M number can differ from our finding.

[CrossRef]

The PbS nanowires referred to in this work are not greatly influenced by surface trap states; see Ref. [5], and the follow-up work by Y. Yang, J. Li, H. Wu, E. Oh, and D. Yu, Nano Lett.12, 5890 (2012). Therefore, the M value found is a fair measure of the impurity concentration.

H. Kind, H. Yan, B. Messer, M. Law, and P. Yang, Adv. Mat. 14, 158 (2002).

Space-charge limited photocurrent scales with Iin3/4; see V. D. Mihailetchi, J. Wildeman, and P. W. M. Blom, Phys. Rev. Lett.94, 126602 (2005), and references therein.

[CrossRef]

R. Graham, C. Miller, E. Oh, and D. Yu, Nano Lett., 11, 717 (2011).

T. S. Moss, Photoconductivity in the Elements (Academic, 1952).

T. S. Moss, Optical Properties of Semi-Conductors (Academic, 1959).

R. Graham, C. Miller, E. Oh, and D. Yu, Nano Lett., 11, 717 (2011).

The PbS nanowires referred to in this work are not greatly influenced by surface trap states; see Ref. [5], and the follow-up work by Y. Yang, J. Li, H. Wu, E. Oh, and D. Yu, Nano Lett.12, 5890 (2012). Therefore, the M value found is a fair measure of the impurity concentration.

In Ref. [6] no information was provided about the impurity concentration in the sample. We noticed, however, that the reported M∼6×1017 cm−3 for ZnO nanowires by H. Oh, J.-J. Kim, J.-O. Lee, and S. S. Kim, J. Korean Phys. Soc.58, 291 (2011), is in good agreement with our fit result. We stress, however, that we do not have specifics about the presence of surface traps in the samples used in Ref. [6], and, therefore, the actual M number can differ from our finding.

[CrossRef]

M. D. Tabak and P. J. Warter, Phys. Rev. 148, 982 (1966).

[CrossRef]

B. Ullrich and H. Xi, Opt. Lett. 35, 3910 (2010).

[CrossRef]

K. P. Acharya and B. Ullrich, Proc. SPIE 6890, 68900Q (2008).

[CrossRef]

C. Bouchenaki, B. Ullrich, J. P. Zielinger, H. N. Cong, and P. Chartier, J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 8, 691 (1991).

[CrossRef]

M. D. Tabak and P. J. Warter, Phys. Rev. 148, 982 (1966).

[CrossRef]

Space-charge limited photocurrent scales with Iin3/4; see V. D. Mihailetchi, J. Wildeman, and P. W. M. Blom, Phys. Rev. Lett.94, 126602 (2005), and references therein.

[CrossRef]

The PbS nanowires referred to in this work are not greatly influenced by surface trap states; see Ref. [5], and the follow-up work by Y. Yang, J. Li, H. Wu, E. Oh, and D. Yu, Nano Lett.12, 5890 (2012). Therefore, the M value found is a fair measure of the impurity concentration.

H. Kind, H. Yan, B. Messer, M. Law, and P. Yang, Adv. Mat. 14, 158 (2002).

H. Kind, H. Yan, B. Messer, M. Law, and P. Yang, Adv. Mat. 14, 158 (2002).

The PbS nanowires referred to in this work are not greatly influenced by surface trap states; see Ref. [5], and the follow-up work by Y. Yang, J. Li, H. Wu, E. Oh, and D. Yu, Nano Lett.12, 5890 (2012). Therefore, the M value found is a fair measure of the impurity concentration.

R. Graham, C. Miller, E. Oh, and D. Yu, Nano Lett., 11, 717 (2011).

The PbS nanowires referred to in this work are not greatly influenced by surface trap states; see Ref. [5], and the follow-up work by Y. Yang, J. Li, H. Wu, E. Oh, and D. Yu, Nano Lett.12, 5890 (2012). Therefore, the M value found is a fair measure of the impurity concentration.

Z. R. Khan, M. S. Khan, M. Zulfequar, and M. S. Khan, Mat. Sci. Appl. 2, 340 (2011).

H. Kind, H. Yan, B. Messer, M. Law, and P. Yang, Adv. Mat. 14, 158 (2002).

Z. R. Khan, M. S. Khan, M. Zulfequar, and M. S. Khan, Mat. Sci. Appl. 2, 340 (2011).

R. Graham, C. Miller, E. Oh, and D. Yu, Nano Lett., 11, 717 (2011).

M. D. Tabak and P. J. Warter, Phys. Rev. 148, 982 (1966).

[CrossRef]

R. N. Hall, Proc. IEE—Part B 106, 923 (1959).

K. P. Acharya and B. Ullrich, Proc. SPIE 6890, 68900Q (2008).

[CrossRef]

T. S. Moss, Photoconductivity in the Elements (Academic, 1952).

T. S. Moss, Optical Properties of Semi-Conductors (Academic, 1959).

It was shown in Ref. [3] that Eq. (1) holds for n- and p-type semiconductors (in the original work called excess conductor and defect conductor); i.e., M refers to the density of either ionized donors or acceptors.

Space-charge limited photocurrent scales with Iin3/4; see V. D. Mihailetchi, J. Wildeman, and P. W. M. Blom, Phys. Rev. Lett.94, 126602 (2005), and references therein.

[CrossRef]

The PbS nanowires referred to in this work are not greatly influenced by surface trap states; see Ref. [5], and the follow-up work by Y. Yang, J. Li, H. Wu, E. Oh, and D. Yu, Nano Lett.12, 5890 (2012). Therefore, the M value found is a fair measure of the impurity concentration.

When the IPC data are plotted versus the incident laser power, as in Fig. 3, the slope parameter σ becomes α/(AhνinBM2) with the unit 1/W. The symbol A stands for the area of the laser spot.

In Ref. [6] no information was provided about the impurity concentration in the sample. We noticed, however, that the reported M∼6×1017 cm−3 for ZnO nanowires by H. Oh, J.-J. Kim, J.-O. Lee, and S. S. Kim, J. Korean Phys. Soc.58, 291 (2011), is in good agreement with our fit result. We stress, however, that we do not have specifics about the presence of surface traps in the samples used in Ref. [6], and, therefore, the actual M number can differ from our finding.

[CrossRef]

M. Bleicher, Halbleiter-Optoelektronik (Huethig, 1985).